Police official held guilty in a 2013 New Delhi bribery case
A court has held a Delhi police official guilty of demanding and accepting Rs 10,000 bribe from a person for releasing his impounded car
New Delhi: A court has held a Delhi police official guilty of demanding and accepting Rs 10,000 bribe from a person for releasing his impounded car.
Special CBI Judge Brijesh Kumar Garg convicted head constable Dev Raj under Prevention of Corruption Act for accepting bribe from complainant Narinder Singh in 2013 as a favour to release his Santro car which was being driven by his friend when it was impounded in a traffic violation case.
The court, while holding Raj guilty, relied on electronic evidence and testimonies of the complainant as well as CBI officers who had laid a trap to catch him red-handed.
"The prosecution has successfully proved, beyond a shadow of doubt, by oral as well as corroborative electronic and forensic evidence that the accused (Raj) has demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs 10,000 from the complainant for releasing his car...
"In the present case, the accused has failed to present any plausible or reasonable defence to rebut the presumption and to prove his innocence. No material evidence has been produced on record in his defence..." the court, which is yet to pronounce the quantum of sentence, said.
According to prosecution, on August 20, 2013, Singh's car, which was being driven by his friend, was seized by traffic police and was deposited at Kanjhawala police station here after a quarrel took place between Singh's friend and police.
In his complaint, lodged on September 2, 2013, Singh alleged that when he met head constable Dev Raj in the police station, he was asked to bring money to get the car released. Singh then approached the CBI officials, who laid a trap to catch the accused cop red-handed.
During the trial, the cop had denied the allegations and contended that he was falsely implicated.
The court, however, rejected his contention and said, "the clinching electronic evidence, in the form of recorded conversations between the accused and the complainant has corroborated the prosecution case and has ruled out any inference of false implication of accused."